On Learning The Rules And Breaking Them Anyway

I'm a guest over at Adventures in Children's Publishing for WOW Wednesday! Come say hi and leave a comment if the spirit moves you!

On Learning the Rules and Breaking Them Anyway

Face Off Friday: Prologues

Photo by Martialartsnomad.com

2015 Update: I have to admit that I am guilty of loving a prologue. Since getting published, I've used them in a number of books. However, generally, I'm using them for reunion stories. Like Melt Into You, I show what happened between the hero and heroine when they were teens then jump forward in time to the present. I think it builds their characters quickly, and I can show the past in "real time" instead of dropping in chunks of past backstory later. My prologues are always real time, action-oriented scenes. They are always about the hero or heroine, not an outside character. And sometimes I won't even label them the prologue, I'll just call it chapter one and put a time stamp on it. My editor has never pushed back. I've learned over the years that if you can figure out how to do something well, most rules can be broken. ;) The important part is to make sure you're not using it as a cheat.  

Today, I'm resurrecting an old debate--the loved/dreaded/maligned prologue.  The rumor is that writers love them and agents/publishers hate them.  Some quotes from our favorite blogging agents:

99.9% of the time, the prologue is vague or doesn’t really give me a sense of the writing or the story that’s going to unfold. I skip them as a general rule. --Kristin Nelson, Pub Rants

It is 3-5 pages of introductory material that is written while the author is procrastinating from writing a more difficult section of the book. --Nathan Bransford's definition

Previously, I talked about the written and unwritten rules of writing I have discovered along the way.  The one that many of you had pain over was the fact that prologues are frowned upon.  So, I thought I would delve deeper into that topic today.

First, let's define a few types of "pre-chapters": 

Prologue is a preface to the story, setting up the story, giving background information and other miscellaneous information. --wiki

A preface is an introduction to a book written by the author of the book. A preface generally covers the story of how the book came into being, or how the idea for the book was developed; this is often followed by thanks and acknowledgments to people who were helpful to the author during the time of writing. --wiki

A foreword is a (usually short) piece of writing often found at the beginning of a book or other piece of literature, before the introduction, and written by someone other than the author of the book. --wiki

Okay, so what most of us are dealing with is the first one, as the preface and foreward are typically used for non-fiction works. (However, Twilight breaks this rule--what's new--and uses the term preface for its prologue.)

Prologues are seen in all genres, but are particularly popular in fantasy/sci-fi and thriller/suspense. In fantasy, the prologue often provides information to help the reader understand the strange world that they are about to enter. In suspense, a prologue can contain the killer's point of view or one of his first victims points of view to ratchet up the tension instantly.

So those seem valid reasons to use one, right? What's the problem?

The problem can lie in the fact that the prologue is almost always a big chunk of backstory. And backstory can be dangerous--it risks boring the reader and makes your pace drag. Prologues can also be a sneaky way to hide a slow-moving first chapter. The latter is how it's used in Twilight. We get a glimpse of the end action--an unnamed victim being stalked by a unknown predator--before we enter into chapter one where nothing much interesting happens for many pages.

However, prologues aren't always terrible. Hush, Hush had a prologue. The brief pages showed a scene that explained what happened to one of the characters to make him the way he was. In this novel, I didn't mind the prologue and its purpose was clear. Could the story have been sprinkled in later? Perhaps, but the prologue was a big shining billboard that said--"hey this is about angels!" and the scene had tension and action, not just flowery language about some random legend.

So when is it a good idea to include a prologue and when do you need to cut it?

Prologue vs. No Prologue

For love of the prologue:

• Fantasy/Sci-fi/Paranormal can be difficult to jump into without explaining a bit of the mythology/legend/world first.
• Some of the greats used prologues
• It can build tension early
• You have a helluva twist coming later that you need to foreshadow
• There is history that is vital to your story that must be introduced early

Nix the prologue because you are probably using it to cheat and do one of the following: 

• Set the mood/atmosphere because you failed to do so in the opening chapter
• Info dump because you can't figure out where to sprinkle in the backstory
• Create tension because your chapter one is slow and you can't bear to edit it again
• Not trusting that your reader is smart enough to understand the world you created
• Your story or fantasy world is overly complicated and you want to get the reader a school lesson on it first

Another thought:

 "Writers hope to create suspense and interest by writing a prologue about the person who turns out to be the villain but without identifying that person by name or gender. Sorry, but in my opinion, that's a cheap parlor trick and your reader knows it. You're better off doing the hard work of creating suspense and tension with your hero and heroine."--author Carolyn Jewel 

So what's your opinion? How do you feel about prologues in the stories your read? Do you have a prologue in any of your stories? Are you using it for the right reasons or are you worried it's a cheat? Do you think they should be used only as a last resort?

The Beta Club Crit Project is ON! Come sign up!

Cartoon Credit: inkygirl.com

So I am beyond excited that so many of you are willing to volunteer for a public critique here on the blog.  Y'all rock!  I think this is going to be a great exercise for everyone.  I know we can all learn from each other.

Now, as the comments rolled in yesterday I realized--oh, I should probably make some sort of guidelines or rules.  Ha.  Maybe should have thought of that a bit earlier, but better late than never, right?

And so, the rules, my friends...

1.  Participants can submit 500-750 word passages to me via email.  (Click on the blue @ under my picture).  I think that will be a good length to start with.  I know commenters don't have a ton of time to spend, so I don't want the passage to be too long.  You can submit from anywhere in your manuscript but getting your opening critted will probably be of most value.

2.  Please put in the subject line FOR BLOG CRIT and submit attachment as .doc, .docx or .rtf format.  Please DOUBLE SPACE with 12 point font.

3.  Please cut and paste this form and fill it out to include in the email:

Title: 

Genre:

Do you give me permission to post this passage publicly on the Fiction Groupie blog?

Do you give permission for me to use Scribd format to post your crit in PDF form on this blog? (All Scribd documents will be kept as private in Scribd system.  No one will have access except here on the blog.)

What theme song would you like for your post?  If you don't choose one, I'll pick one for you.

Do you want this posted anonymously or do you want your name/link listed on the post? 

*If you do not give permission in questions 1 or 2, I'm sorry, but will not be able to crit your work.*

4.  All authors will have the choice to remain anonymous or to reveal themselves (see form above).  The author will also get a word version of my crit emailed to them after the blog post.

5.  All commenters will agree to be constructive and honest in their feedback.  We are writers who are being supportive of each others journey, so no ugliness, mmm kay?  If you cross the line, I will delete you like an unnecessary adverb.

6.  If an author decides they want their passage pulled down at any point, just let me know and I will remove it.

7.  Passages will go up on a first come basis, so when I get your email, you will be put in queue.  I will let you know when yours is going to be up.

8.  The format will be the following:

Title:
Genre:
The unedited passage (so people can read it through without being influenced by my opinion)
Then my crit of it in Scribd format, which will look like this (you should be able to click on view full screen and once you're in full screen right click to zoom so you can read it--please let me know if that's not working):

Mary Lamb

Then you guys can add your own comments.

9.  All genres except non-fiction and poetry will be accepted (memoir is fine).  If the submission is erotic romance/erotica, please be sure the excerpt is appropriate for my PG-13 blog.  (Cursing is fine, but will be bleeped out via #$*&.)

10.  These rules are subject to change as we learn more.  This feature can be discontinued at any time, which may mean your work doesn't get critiqued.

For now, I'm going to try this out as a Tuesday/Thursday feature.  The success of this will be dependent on your level of participation.  So beyond volunteering to be critted (which is awesome), please take the time to read through people's passages and offer feedback.  If nothing else, you'll get writer karma points.  ;)

Alright, so what do you think?  Am I missing any issues?  Do you think any of the above is going to be a problem?  Is the Scribd format easy to read when you open it (I'm trying to find the easiest way to present the crit--blogger isn't so friendly for that)?  

And finally...submissions are OPEN!  So email me to get your passage in queue!  Thanks guys, I look forward to reading everyone's work.  :)

**Today's Theme Song**

"Come Out and Play" - The Offspring

(player in sidebar--go ahead, take a listen)

"Oh no! Melodrama!" she screamed as she collapsed into tears.

 
 

There are a lot of fine lines in writing: creating a sense of place v. bogging down reader with description, creating a new spin on an old idea v. being derivative, creating characters with depth v. backstory overload, etc. Another one that I've had trouble defining the line between is drama and melodrama.

Our stories are supposed to have conflict and drama. What's the point otherwise? However, when that story inches into melodrama we risk losing our reader. Instead of connecting with the characters and feeling part of the story, our readers start rolling their eyes. So how can we tell the difference?

This is especially difficult to determine if we're writing a teen story. I'm not going to stereotype, but looking back at myself as a teen, I was quite melodramatic. My high school was my whole world and every event and emotion was amplified. When my crush didn't like me, it was cause for tears and incessant listening of depressing and sappy music. When a good friend gave me the silent treatment for a week, I thought we would never be able to overcome such a terrible turn of events. So how do we make sure our characters and plot are authentic and believable and interesting without sending it into the realm the soap opera?

First my quick definition...

Melodrama is when emotions, plot, or actions are too over the top. My litmus test is if a scene that is intended to be emotional/heartfelt/painful would tempt readers to groan, roll their eyes, or laugh, then I've crossed over the line.

I'll use Twilight as an example since most of you have probably read it or seen the movie. In the scene at the hospital in the first movie (see pic above), Edward tells Bella she needs to stay away from him for her own safety. Bella sits up, panicked, stuttering "No, you can't leave me! We can't be apart." The line in and of itself is fine, but this scene made me giggle in the theatre. Also, in the book New Moon, Bella's reaction to Edward leaving is um, intense, to say the least. Months of depression and becoming an adrenaline junkie seem a tad melodramatic to me. (Disclaimer: I have admitted to loving Twilight, so please no hate comments from devoted fans. Despite the problems I see in the stories, I can't help but be hooked. I'll be in line on opening night of the next movie.)

So what can we do to avoid crossing this line?

 

• Beware the exclamation point! It's rarely needed and is usually a beacon of melodrama

 

• Watch words like screamed, shouted, sobbed, cried, etc. Use them sparingly.

• Put yourself inside your characters. If A, B, or C happened to you, how would you react? Of course, your character hasn't a different backstory than you, but this will give you a start to find an authentic reaction. I mean, really, how many of us are actually swooning when we see a hot guy?

• Don't have your characters act contrived just to fit a plot need. They're actions must be based on realistic/logical motivations that you've developed in the story. i.e. If a character is mild-mannered throughout, but you need an emotional scene so all of a sudden she flies off the handle with no logical motivation to do so or previous behavior to back it up.

• No TSTL (too stupid to live) characters. i.e. running up that stairs when a serial killer breaks into the house, heroine believing something the bad guy tells her when she KNOWS he's the bad guy. Your readers won't buy it.

• Avoid stereotyped characters--the wise old man/woman, the evil ex-wife/other woman, the naive virgin, the bitchy popular girl, the hooker with the heart of gold, the perfect/infallible male love interest. If you use any of these, you need to make sure there is a twist on it. For example, in PC Cast's Marked series, Aphrodite starts as the stereotypical blonde mean girl, but develops into something much different as the series goes on.

• Watch out for huge coincidences. Yes, when writing, we're playing God, but that doesn't mean we can twist fate to create unbelievable coincidences. Your reader will give a big "yeah right" or "my, isn't that convenient?"

• This is related to the coincidence thing, but be careful of creating conflict after conflict after conflict to where there is no way to believe that all that would happen to one person. The best example I can think of is the first seasons of 24. Jack's daughter's Kim couldn't keep herself out of trouble. How many times can one girl get herself kidnapped or put in mortal danger? It became a joke in our house--how will Kim try to get herself killed this week?

 

And if in doubt, picture a scene through the eyes of a Saturday Night Live writer. How much rewriting would you have to do on that scene to recreate it for comedy/satire on the show? If the answer is "not much", you may have jumped into the melodrama hot tub.

So am I the only one who struggles with this line? How do you determine if you've gone too far? And what are some of your favorite melodramatic books/movies/tv shows?

 

**Today's Theme Song**

"Selling the Drama" - Live

(player in sidebar--go ahead, take a listen)

Face Off Friday: Prologues

It's that time of the week again: Face Off Friday. On today's agenda, the loved/dreaded/maligned prologue. The rumor is that writers love them and agents/publishers hate them. Some quotes from our favorite blogging agents:

 

99.9% of the time, the prologue is vague or doesn’t really give me a sense of the writing or the story that’s going to unfold. I skip them as a general rule. --Kristen Nelson, Pub Rants

It is 3-5 pages of introductory material that is written while the author is procrastinating from writing a more difficult section of the book. --Nathan Bransford's definition

 

Earlier in the week, I talked about the written and unwritten rules of writing I have discovered along the way. The one that many of you had pain over was the fact that prologues are frowned upon. So, I thought I would delve deeper into that topic today.

First, let's define a few types of "pre-chapters":

 

Prologue is a preface to the story, setting up the story, giving background information and other miscellaneous information. --wiki

A preface is an introduction to a book written by the author of the book. A preface generally covers the story of how the book came into being, or how the idea for the book was developed; this is often followed by thanks and acknowledgments to people who were helpful to the author during the time of writing. --wiki

A foreword is a (usually short) piece of writing often found at the beginning of a book or other piece of literature, before the introduction, and written by someone other than the author of the book. --wiki

Okay, so what most of us are dealing with is the first one, as the preface and foreward are typically used for non-fiction works. (However, Twilight breaks this rule--what's new--and uses the term preface for its prologue.)

Prologues are seen in all genres, but are particularly popular in fantasy/sci-fi and thriller/suspense. In fantasy, the prologue often provides information to help the reader understand the strange world that they are about to enter. In suspense, a prologue can contain the killer's point of view or one of his first victims points of view to ratchet up the tension instantly.

So those seem valid reasons to use one, right? What's the problem?

The problem can lie in the fact that the prologue is almost always a big chunk of backstory. And backstory can be dangerous--it risks boring the reader and makes your pace drag. Prologues can also be a sneaky way to hide a slow-moving first chapter. (I have NEVER used this device for this sordid purpose, *cough*.) The latter is how it's used in Twilight. We get a glimpse of the end action--an unnamed victim being stalked by a unknown predator--before we enter into chapter one where nothing much interesting happens for many pages.

However, prologues aren't always terrible. Hush, Hush which I just reviewed recently had a prologue. The brief pages showed a scene that explained what happened to one of the characters to make him the way he was. In this novel, I didn't mind the prologue and its purpose was clear. Could the story have been sprinkled in later? Perhaps, but the prologue was a big shining billboard that said--"hey this is about angels!" and the scene had tension and action, not just flowery language about some random legend.

So when is it a good idea to include a prologue and when do you need to cut it?

Prologue vs. No Prologue

For love of the prologue:

 

• Fantasy/Sci-fi/Paranormal can be difficult to jump into without explaining a bit of the mythology/legend/world first.
• Some of the greats used prologues
• It can build tension early
• You have a helluva twist coming later that you need to foreshadow
• There is history that is vital to your story that must be introduced early

 

Nix the prologue because you are probably using it to cheat and do one of the following:

 

• Set the mood/atmosphere because you failed to do so in the opening chapter
• Info dump because you can't figure out where to sprinkle in the backstory
• Create tension because your chapter one is slow and you can't bear to edit it again
• Not trusting that your reader is smart enough to understand the world you created
• Your story or fantasy world is overly complicated and you want to get the reader a school lesson on it first

 

Another thought:

 

"Writers hope to create suspense and interest by writing a prologue about the person who turns out to be the villain but without identifying that person by name or gender. Sorry, but in my opinion, that's a cheap parlor trick and your reader knows it. You're better off doing the hard work of creating suspense and tension with your hero and heroine."--author Carolyn Jewel

 

I have to admit that I am guilty of loving a prologue. The one I had for my first novel was unnecessary and I was using it as a cheat (cheap foreshadowing). I cut it a few months ago and saw that I never needed it. However, I do have some mythology that could be helpful in a prologue, so even though I haven't added it, I'm constantly tempted. *sits on hands for a moment to keep from typing one up*

However, I am a little afraid of including one based on the may negative opinions out there. Most agents/authors say it should be used as a last resort. I don't want to do anything to hurt my already slim chances of breaking into the world of publishing.

So what's your opinion? How do you feel about prologues in the stories your read? Do you have a prologue in any of your stories? Are you using it for the right reasons or are you worried it's a cheat? Do you think they should be used only as a last resort?

**Today's Theme Song**

"Your Cheatin' Heart" - Patsy Cline

(player in sidebar--go ahead, take a listen)

No! No! Bad Writer

Growing up, I was a girl who (except for the occasional rebellious moment) followed the rules. I wanted my parents, family, and teachers to be proud of me. I did what I was supposed to, got the As, and developed a bit of a perfectionistic personality. In many ways, this was a good thing. On the other hand, worrying about perfection is a bit maddening because of course it can never be achieved.

When I started to get serious about my writing last year, I jumped in and just started typing. I didn't pick up a writing book, read an agent blog, or do a lick of research. Very unlike me. But the creative juices were churning and I needed to get the words on the page before I did anything else. Once I finished my first draft, I took a breath and started to read more about writing. And boy, oh boy, there was enough out there to send me into a near panic attack.

There was so much I didn't know, so many rules I had never heard of. I thought with a firm grasp on grammer, an idea about story structure, and the show don't tell rule, I was good to go. I had no idea there was a written (and unwritten) code of the do's and don'ts of writing. This, of course, sent my anal-retentiveness into overdrive. I jumped into editing and tried to fix the things I had no idea were wrong the first time around. Then, draft after draft, I would discover a new rule I wasn't aware of and would have to go back through again. It was liking trying to break the code into a secret society.

And it hasn't stopped yet. I'm still learning new rules and agent/publisher preferences every day. At times, it's overwhelming, but I want my manuscripts to be as good as they can be, so I'll keep digging and finding out what I can. I know I can never reach perfection, but I can sure try, lol.

What I Done Learnt So Far:

1. Adverbs are the devil incarnate. They will steal the soul of your verbs.

2. Excessive adjectives are like white shoes after Labor Day.

3. Prologues (this one hurt) are not your friend.

4. Dialogue tags are like big, fat "I'm a new writer" billboards in your manuscript

5. The being verbs are the ugly stepchildren of the verb family

6. You want verbs that go to the gym--nice and strong.

7. Rhetorical questions in query letters make agents burn your letter in a weekly bonfire.

8. Backstory should be slipped in like roofies into a drink--your reader didn't even notice it happened.

9. Present Participial phrases are generally bad. (This one is a new discovery for me. Editortorent has a whole series on PPPs alone.)

10. Hidden/Buried Dialogue is not preferred and slows down your pacing. (This one is also new to me. My handy dandy critique group gave me a lesson on this one recently. Apparently, dialogue passages need to be in one of the following structures:

• dialogue -->narrative-->dialogue
• narrative-->dialogue
• dialogue-->narrative

NOT narrative-->dialogue-->narrative OR (my personal favorite) Dialogue-->narrative-->dialogue-->narrative. Don't bury dialogue in the middle of narrative. I did this all over the place, including the submissions I currently have with agents--sigh).

I'm sure there are hundreds more rules, but these are the ones that made the most impact on me.

What writing rules have you discovered that you never knew existed? Which rule stabbed you in the heart when you heard it? Which one is your biggest enemy--the one who sneaks in your writing all the time?

**Today's Theme Song**

"Know Your Enemy"-- Green Day

(player in sidebar, take a listen)

Face Off Friday: Say it pretty vs. Say what you mean

Scott over at The Literary Lab (great blog, btw) had a post this week on overwritten prose. He argued that writers, especially newbies, often try too hard to sound "writerly" and trump up their prose with unnecessary adjectives, adverbs, and metaphors. In other words, purple prose.

Wiki defines purple prose as "prose that is overly extravagant, ornate, or flowery as to break the flow and draw attention to itself. Purple prose is sensually evocative beyond the requirements of its context."

Here is the famous example (from Wiki): A more recent author famous for purple prose is Edward Bulwer-Lytton, 1st Baron Lytton (1803–73), who begins his novel Paul Clifford (1830) with the sentence:

It was a dark and stormy night; the rain fell in torrents—except at occasional intervals, when it was checked by a violent gust of wind which swept up the streets (for it is in London that our scene lies), rattling along the housetops, and fiercely agitating the scanty flame of the lamps that struggled against the darkness.

**I will say I don't mind "It was a dark and stormy night" as it's also the first line of A Wrinkle in Time, my favorite childhood book.***

In the comments section of his blog, a debate began. Some argued that purple prose is actually very common in many of the classics and shouldn't be vilified. They also argued that just because someone should write accurately, does not mean they have to be brief. Brevity can sometimes come at the sacrifice of lush and beautiful language.

So here we go with the face off:

Say it Pretty vs. Say What You Mean Prose

For love of Purple:

• Many classics, which have been lauded as great writing, contain purple passages
• Without beautiful, flowery words, we're reduced to lackluster sentences
• Why do we have such a rich language if we aren't going to use all those lovely words?
• This type of prose does not mean it has to be inaccurate writing. You can say what you mean and still say it in a beautiful way.
• Brevity is a trend, not a rule.

On the less is more side:

• Say what you mean and don't dress it up to make it look fancier.
• Being brief and accurate does not mean the writing must suffer--straightforward prose can be beautiful

  In The Book on Writing by Paula LaRoque, she suggest an exercise where you take a passage and only use one syllable words. When a high school student performed this exercise, she/he came up with "When I stepped through the rocks to glimpse the coast for the first time in my life, I was awed. The wide blue sea glowed with light from the sun, and wisps of smooth white clouds soared in the huge free sky." Maybe too many adjectives still, but pretty, using only one syllable words. I love the idea of the huge free sky.

 

Lisa McCann (Wake- excerpt) and Laurie Halse Anderson (Speak
) also do a really good job of being brief but impactful.

• Purple prose often tells instead of shows
• It often contains unnecessary information.
• It's painful to read.

So, I will admit that I have a personal bias on this. I hate long passages of flowery language. This type of writing has never done it for me even before I knew what purple prose was. I often find myself skimming through pages of long descriptions to get to the "good" part. Maybe this is a sign of undiagnosed ADD, I'm not sure. However, I can say that I don't enjoy these passages. I have a very functional imagination. You tell me the kids are in a high school gym, I've got a picture. I don't need to know the color of the floors or that is has basketball goals, unless either of those play some crucial role in the plot. But I know not everyone feels this way.

What's your opinion? Do you love the beauty of this type of writing or do you skim past these passages like I do? Do you catch yourself putting passages like these in your own writing or do you have the opposite problem and struggle with description?